Difference between revisions of "European Union Intellectual Property Office (2016)"
m (Saved using "Save and continue" button in form) |
|||
(4 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
|Title=Intellectual Property and Youth. | |Title=Intellectual Property and Youth. | ||
|Year=2016 | |Year=2016 | ||
− | |Full Citation= | + | |Full Citation=European Union Intellectual Property Office (2016). Intellectual Property and Youth. |
|Abstract=A 2013 study of what European citizens think about Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) demonstrated that not everyone fully accepts the contribution to the economy they make and that young people in particular can be sceptical. | |Abstract=A 2013 study of what European citizens think about Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) demonstrated that not everyone fully accepts the contribution to the economy they make and that young people in particular can be sceptical. | ||
In response to these results the Office set out to try and better understand the attitudes of 15-24 year olds via the current IP Youth Scoreboard, which will be repeated on a regular basis to monitor evolution. | In response to these results the Office set out to try and better understand the attitudes of 15-24 year olds via the current IP Youth Scoreboard, which will be repeated on a regular basis to monitor evolution. | ||
Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
|Link=https://euipo.europa.eu/tunnel-web/secure/webdav/guest/document_library/observatory/documents/IP_youth_scoreboard_study/IP_youth_scoreboard_study_en.pdf | |Link=https://euipo.europa.eu/tunnel-web/secure/webdav/guest/document_library/observatory/documents/IP_youth_scoreboard_study/IP_youth_scoreboard_study_en.pdf | ||
|Reference=OHIM (2013b); | |Reference=OHIM (2013b); | ||
− | |Plain Text Proposition=To briefly summarise a few of the main findings, the report reveals that young European citizens feel there is a lack of information about IP that would help them understand the issues. They also say that the information that is available is not communicated effectively to their age group. These factors combine to produce an atmosphere of indifference so that many young people who have been brought up in this digital age do not care whether they infringe IP or not. | + | |Plain Text Proposition=To briefly summarise a few of the main findings, the report reveals that young European citizens feel there is a lack of information about IP that would help them understand the issues. They also say that the information that is available is not communicated effectively to their age group. These factors combine to produce an atmosphere of indifference so that many young people who have been brought up in this digital age do not care whether they infringe IP or not.Around one third of the study respondents also identify the lack of availability of the films or television series that their colleagues from the US or other places have access to as a factor driving them to illegal sources.Finally, and possibly most importantly, two thirds of those polled identified price as a significant driver for using illegal sources. |
− | Around one third of the study respondents also identify the lack of availability of the films or television series that their colleagues from the US or other places have access to as a factor driving them to illegal sources. | + | |FundamentalIssue=5. Understanding consumption/use (e.g. determinants of unlawful behaviour; user-generated content; social media),1. Relationship between protection (subject matter/term/scope) and supply/economic development/growth/welfare,4. Effects of protection on industry structure (e.g. oligopolies; competition; economics of superstars; business models; technology adoption) |
− | Finally, and possibly most importantly, two thirds of those polled identified price as a significant driver for using illegal sources. | + | |EvidenceBasedPolicy=D. Licensing and Business models (collecting societies; meta data; exchanges/hubs; windowing; crossborder availability),F. Enforcement (quantifying infringement; criminal sanctions; intermediary liability; graduated response; litigation and court data; commercial/non-commercial distinction; education and awareness) |
− | |FundamentalIssue=5. Understanding consumption/use (e.g. determinants of unlawful behaviour; user-generated content; social media), 1. Relationship between protection (subject matter/term/scope) and supply/economic development/growth/welfare, 4. Effects of protection on industry structure (e.g. oligopolies; competition; economics of superstars; business models; technology adoption) | ||
− | |EvidenceBasedPolicy=D. Licensing and Business models (collecting societies; meta data; exchanges/hubs; windowing; crossborder availability), F. Enforcement (quantifying infringement; criminal sanctions; intermediary liability; graduated response; litigation and court data; commercial/non-commercial distinction; education and awareness) | ||
|Discipline=K42: Illegal Behavior and the Enforcement of Law, O34: Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital | |Discipline=K42: Illegal Behavior and the Enforcement of Law, O34: Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital | ||
− | |Intervention-Response=To sum up the results of both qualitative and quantitative parts of the report, a good offer in terms of price and availability coupled with a well-designed communication | + | |Intervention-Response=To sum up the results of both qualitative and quantitative parts of the report, a good offer in terms of price and availability coupled with a well-designed communication campaign including safety and moral arguments as well as information on what is legal and what is not and why, provided in a neutral tone and delivered by the right ambassadors, is likely to be the most effective way to change the behaviours and attitudes of young people towards IP infringement. |
− | campaign including safety and moral arguments as well as information on what is legal and what is not and why, provided in a neutral tone and delivered by the right | + | |Description of Data=The study consists of qualitative data and quantitative data. The qualitative data was collected during 28 focus groups. A 2 hour focus group consisting of 15 to 24 year olds was held in each of the 28 member states of the European Union. The quantitative data was collected from an online survey, with 24 295 participants aged 15 to 24. |
− | ambassadors, is likely to be the most effective way to change the behaviours and attitudes of young people towards IP infringement. | ||
− | |Description of Data=The study consists of qualitative data and quantitative data. The qualitative data was collected during focus groups. A 2 hour focus group consisting of 15 to 24 year olds was held in each of the 28 member states of the European Union. The quantitative data was collected from an online survey, with 24 295 participants aged 15 to 24. | ||
|Data Year=2015 | |Data Year=2015 | ||
|Data Type=Primary data | |Data Type=Primary data | ||
− | |Method of Collection=Quantitative Collection Methods, Survey Research (quantitative; e.g. sales/income reporting), Qualitative Collection Methods, Semi-Structured Interview, Focus Groups | + | |Method of Collection=Quantitative Collection Methods, Survey Research (quantitative; e.g. sales/income reporting), Qualitative Collection Methods, Semi-Structured Interview, Focus Groups, Quantitative Collection Methods |
− | |Method of Analysis=Quantitative Analysis Methods, Quantitative content analysis (e.g. text or data mining), Qualitative Analysis Methods, Qualitative Coding / Sorting (e.g. of interview data) | + | |Method of Analysis=Quantitative Analysis Methods, Quantitative content analysis (e.g. text or data mining), Qualitative Analysis Methods, Qualitative Coding / Sorting (e.g. of interview data), Quantitative Analysis Methods |
− | |Country=European Union | + | |Country=European Union |
|Cross-country=Yes | |Cross-country=Yes | ||
|Comparative=Yes | |Comparative=Yes | ||
|Government or policy=Yes | |Government or policy=Yes | ||
|Literature review=No | |Literature review=No | ||
− | |Funded By= | + | |Funded By=European Commission |
+ | }} | ||
+ | |Dataset={{Dataset | ||
+ | |Sample Size=28 | ||
+ | |Level of Aggregation=Focus Groups | ||
+ | |Data Material Year=2015 | ||
+ | }}{{Dataset | ||
+ | |Sample Size=24295 | ||
+ | |Level of Aggregation=Individual | ||
+ | |Data Material Year=2015 | ||
}} | }} | ||
− | |||
}} | }} |
Latest revision as of 08:04, 18 May 2020
Contents
Source Details
European Union Intellectual Property Office (2016) | |
Title: | Intellectual Property and Youth. |
Author(s): | European Union Intellectual Property Office |
Year: | 2016 |
Citation: | European Union Intellectual Property Office (2016). Intellectual Property and Youth. |
Link(s): | Definitive , Open Access |
Key Related Studies: | |
Discipline: | |
Linked by: |
About the Data | |
Data Description: | The study consists of qualitative data and quantitative data. The qualitative data was collected during 28 focus groups. A 2 hour focus group consisting of 15 to 24 year olds was held in each of the 28 member states of the European Union. The quantitative data was collected from an online survey, with 24 295 participants aged 15 to 24. |
Data Type: | Primary data |
Secondary Data Sources: | |
Data Collection Methods: | |
Data Analysis Methods: | |
Industry(ies): | |
Country(ies): | |
Cross Country Study?: | Yes |
Comparative Study?: | Yes |
Literature review?: | No |
Government or policy study?: | Yes |
Time Period(s) of Collection: |
|
Funder(s): |
|
Abstract
A 2013 study of what European citizens think about Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) demonstrated that not everyone fully accepts the contribution to the economy they make and that young people in particular can be sceptical. In response to these results the Office set out to try and better understand the attitudes of 15-24 year olds via the current IP Youth Scoreboard, which will be repeated on a regular basis to monitor evolution. The Scoreboard covers young people in all 28 Member States and its main objective is to gather knowledge on how young people behave online in terms of Intellectual Property Rights. In particular, it explores what are the main drivers and barriers to acquiring digital content and physical goods offered from both legal and illegal sources. Finally, the study assesses what could be done to improve the situation.
Main Results of the Study
To briefly summarise a few of the main findings, the report reveals that young European citizens feel there is a lack of information about IP that would help them understand the issues. They also say that the information that is available is not communicated effectively to their age group. These factors combine to produce an atmosphere of indifference so that many young people who have been brought up in this digital age do not care whether they infringe IP or not.Around one third of the study respondents also identify the lack of availability of the films or television series that their colleagues from the US or other places have access to as a factor driving them to illegal sources.Finally, and possibly most importantly, two thirds of those polled identified price as a significant driver for using illegal sources.
Policy Implications as Stated By Author
To sum up the results of both qualitative and quantitative parts of the report, a good offer in terms of price and availability coupled with a well-designed communication campaign including safety and moral arguments as well as information on what is legal and what is not and why, provided in a neutral tone and delivered by the right ambassadors, is likely to be the most effective way to change the behaviours and attitudes of young people towards IP infringement.
Coverage of Study
Datasets
Sample size: | 28 |
Level of aggregation: | Focus Groups |
Period of material under study: | 2015 |
Sample size: | 24295 |
Level of aggregation: | Individual |
Period of material under study: | 2015 |